Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T21:49:13.831Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide Absorption and Translocation in Plants using Radioisotopes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Vijay K. Nandula  and
William K. Vencill
Vijay K. Nandula*
Affiliation:
Crop Production Systems Research Unit, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Stoneville, MS 38776
William K. Vencill
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: vijay.nandula@ars.usda.gov
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

2,4-D, discovered independently in the United States and Europe in the mid-1940s, was one of the first synthetic herbicides to be used selectively for weed control (Cobb and Reade 2010). Since then, several herbicides belonging to different chemical classes and possessing diverse mechanisms of action have been synthesized and marketed globally. Herbicides have vastly contributed to increasing world food, fiber, fuel, and feed production in an efficient, economic, and environmentally sustainable manner. Before receiving regulatory approval, all herbicides (pesticides) undergo rigorous testing for their toxicological, residual, physicochemical, and biological properties. Additionally, herbicides are suitably formulated to reach their target site and maximize their efficacy on target weeds while being safe on crops.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 63 , Issue SP1: Special Issue: Research Methods in Weed Science , February 2015 , pp. 140 - 151
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America

References

Literature Cited

Camacho, RF, Moshier, LJ (1991) Absorption, translocation, and activity of CGA-136872, DPX-V9360, and glyphosate in rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Sci 39:354–35710.1017/S0043174500073057Google Scholar
Camper, ND, ed. (1986) Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd edn. Champaign, ILSouthern Weed Science Society. 486 pGoogle Scholar
Cobb, AH, Reade, JP (2010) Herbicides and Plant Physiology. 2nd edn. Oxford, UKWiley-Blackwell. 296 p10.1002/9781444327793Google Scholar
Dinelli, G, Marotti, I, Catizone, P, Bonetti, A, Urbano, JM, Barnes, J (2008) Physiological and molecular basis of glyphosate resistance in C. bonariensis (L.) Cronq. biotypes from Spain. Weed Res 48:257–26510.1111/j.1365-3180.2008.00623.xGoogle Scholar
Feng, PC, Tran, M, Chiu, T, Sammons, RD, Heck, GR, CaJacob, CA (2004) Investigation into GR horseweed (Conyza canadensis): retention, uptake, translocation and metabolism. Weed Sci 52:498–50510.1614/WS-03-137RGoogle Scholar
Heap, IM (2013) International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. www.weedscience.org. Accessed July 9, 2013Google Scholar
Hoagland, DR, Arnon, DI (1950) The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Circ. 347. Berkley, CAUniversity of California Agricultural Experiment StationGoogle Scholar
Kniss, AR, Vassios, JD, Nissen, SJ, Ritz, C (2011) Nonlinear regression analysis of herbicide absorption studies. Weed Sci 59:601–61010.1614/WS-D-11-00034.1Google Scholar
Koger, CH, Reddy, KN (2005) Role of absorption and translocation in the mechanism of glyphosate resistance in horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci 53:84–8910.1614/WS-04-102RGoogle Scholar
Lorraine-Colwill, DF, Powles, SB, Hawkes, TR, Hollinshead, PH, Warner, S. A. J., Preston, C (2003) Investigations into the mechanism of glyphosate resistance in Lolium rigidum. Pestic Biochem Physiol 74:62–7210.1016/S0048-3575(03)00007-5Google Scholar
Nandula, VK, Ray, JD, Ribeiro, DN, Pan, Z, Reddy, KN (2013) Glyphosate resistance in tall waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) from Mississippi is due to both altered target site and non-target site mechanisms. Weed Sci 61:374–38310.1614/WS-D-12-00155.1Google Scholar
Nandula, VK, Reddy, KN, Koger, CH, Poston, DH, Rimando, AM, Duke, SO, Bond, JA, Ribeiro, DN (2012) Multiple resistance to glyphosate and pyrithiobac in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) from Mississippi and response to flumiclorac. Weed Sci 60:179–18810.1614/WS-D-11-00157.1Google Scholar
Nandula, VK, Reddy, KN, Poston, DH, Rimando, AM, Duke, SO (2008) Glyphosate-tolerance mechanisms in Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) from Mississippi. Weed Sci 56:344–34910.1614/WS-07-115.1Google Scholar
Perez-Jones, A, Park, K-W, Polge, N, Colquhoun, J, Mallory-Smith, CA (2007) Investigating the mechanisms of glyphosate resistance in Lolium multiflorum. Planta 226:395–40410.1007/s00425-007-0490-6Google Scholar
Shaner, DL (2009) Role of translocation as a mechanism of resistance to glyphosate. Weed Sci 57:118–12310.1614/WS-08-050.1Google Scholar
Wakelin, AM, Lorraine-Colwill, DF, Preston, C (2004) Glyphosate resistance in four different populations of Lolium rigidum as associated with reduced translocation of glyphosate to meristematic zones. Weed Res 44:453–45910.1111/j.1365-3180.2004.00421.xGoogle Scholar
Wehtje, G, Miller, ME, Grey, TL, Brawner, WR Jr. (2007) Comparisons between X-ray film- and phosphorescence imaging-based autoradiography for the visualization of herbicide translocation. Weed Technol 21:1109–111410.1614/WT-06-152.1Google Scholar